Typhoon Tip

The Great Barrington tornado

This 12z Euro run is the better fit for the present teleconnections ... not the the others. Just sayn'.

I know what climate variations over geological time is. What were/are you referring to when you use the word "denialism" - what does that mean in the context? hint hint, I already know what your tact was. This cannot be pointed out any clearer: you are completely off based and just ... wrong, period. The entire ambit of climate research has not only distinguished the difference between natural vs (natural + human influence) in climate change, they have used physical chemistry data to prove it. Let me let you in on a secret that only the enlightened people are aware of ... we don't get to question data that is objectively real. - something that is quite irritatingly obvious at this point, what you are clearly doing is trying to create uncertainty in data measuring practices, that ISN'T THERE. Your are wasting your time. And you are wasting the bandwidth of these threads with this DENIALISM stategy.

You said this, "but no HHH on the visible horizon. " Having a powerful -PNA with a modest -EPO instructing a non-linear tendency for a major trough over the west, while the over arcing AO/NAO mass fields are evolving toward zip blocking, is not consistent with that. It's all good though ... I realize that folks "might" not be necessarily referring to these deeper analytic methods/points when arriving to their conclusions. LOL But I'm not sure what "consistently in the next 2-3 weeks" means ?

For some reason ... I don't share in this idea that because a weekend day rains, the weekend "blows" Be that as it may, I don't mean to belittle anyone's angst for having to deal with a wet weekend. ...just in so much as druthers are concerned.. I see a huge upside for raining on Saturday and/or Sundays. Namely, to those that keep perpetuating the "stein" meme? I hope that every weekend, forever, rains and is ruined for all people that keep typing that word.

Wrong

What does this statement mean?

Teleconnections support a more significant heat ~ D6 ... 12 at some range in there. The operational run blend is dodging that signal with a flattened, fast progressivity to the overall handling. It's not clear if this operational aspect is a bias, or a real a signal... Those two indicators are somewhat in conflict at this time. Just sayn' I wouldn't be very assured in a cooler look between D6 and 12... June 4-8th in particular is when a shallow -EPO teams up with a very strong -PNA, while the NAO is neutral positive, and while all this is happening, the operational heights just refuse to build the ridge through the teleconnector region - There were several run cycles up through about 2.5 days ago that were substantially warmer - actually better fits... The telecon part of this puzzle has not deviated since prior to then, thru it, and up until now, either. The operational runs have been oscillating more than less - right now, they are less. Sometimes when the operational blends disagree with the multi- ensemble source derivatives ( the -PNA ...+EPO... -AO...blah blah), they win. Other times, they lose ... This is probably like in the winter, when there is a loud signal for a large event in the extended, then we 'black out' for 3 days and never hear from it ... only to have it come storming back at 84 hours or whatever. We'll have to keep an eye on it as inCREdible temperature nerds with nothing better to to do than to monitor whether we make 88s out of 77s or not. hahaha. F, it's better than this recreating whining and complaining bs at least.

It's an excuse to keep denying climate change ... that's it. nothing else -

Modeling has been inconsistent with that pinch low near the M/A ... this GGEM solution from 12z looks nothing like it's 00z predecessor wrt that feature. The 12z version of that model would blunt warmth from getting east of the Hudson; the 00z would not. Next week's temperatures would definitely be effected by that should it evolve - some posters are leaping on any model cycle that pimps that an inch more. Haha. Allowing for minimal doubt as to what they want to see happen... But the surrounding super-synoptic scaffolding (both telecon, and established trends) don't really support that feature being there - for now. if that changes, this aspect changes along. Until that happens, I'd side with that being less meaningful. The EPS was not cooler than the 00z though for that period. I'm not entirely sure when the argument is for? but ... here's a comparison between the 00z vs this 12z EPS mean, centered on Wednesday this next week. The 12z right (hand side) if anything is arguable a warmer complexion than the 00z

yeah, you know ... yesterday i even limited the post to one paragraph and still it didn't seem like anyone even read it. but this thing this weekend is not the same beast as that bullshit last - not even close. hasn't been modeled that way for a long time, either. but that type of focused insight into modeling details lending to more realistic impressions, just having interest in general, hasn't happened in this "weather forum" for about 10 years anyway. lol

it's the last of the blocking actually paying dividends up here from the Pike N ... it's pinning that miasma in the mid atlantic i place; meanwhile, we have constant dvm/erosion enough to keep the cloud canopy at bay. solar max sun works on this modulated air mass.... well anyway, it's in the 70s already and much warmer n

Kind of a sneaky warm one incoming today.

I think it's impressive that full foliage and that DP existing at the same time - very rare.

yeah sell the GFS with that thing... that's spurious until it gets anything resembling support - which is far as I've found there is none.

Not really ... 570+ thickness building into the region after D7 ...? though I'm not sure what, nor when, people are whining about in this recreational complaining outlet. But 588 height to Concord NH with 850s > 16C is is not a disaster for warmth and humidity

It all just strikes me as wiring any means together that plausibly justifies denial - nothing else. I mean every fucking version of why it's all open to being untrue has been heard ... and none of those are, in and of themself, true. There are those that simply cannot comprehend a warming world - particularly because they lack advancing intellect and therefore are more reactionary based on the corporeal senses and not higher reasoning... But those truly in that ilk of dimness are actually rarer... The ballast of denial is by those that are capable of the intellect, but are stymied by a myriad of motivated biases... While everyone on the list that is denying, from the morons to polymaths, would gladly admit to it if it literally ( not figuratively) caused them pain. I mean... ouchy ouchy ouchy pain. Really plugged into an existential threat? that cannot happen based upon lecture circuits by leading egg-heads ...which frankly for worse and a historical quirk are also facing the uphill oily road of an unfavorable zeitgeist. This is all just labeling the mechanics that will place our species foot, and countless others ... into the grave

06z no... 00z unlikely to even manifest. That tropical entity is a CAC spin up and the GFS is overzealous with those as an ongoing model bias during warm season ridge eruptions over eastern N/A ... The flow underneath the ridging ends up with an enhanced E and/or calm anomaly, at mid and upper levels, while trade-wind related convection festers below - it is all too favorable for TC genesis for the GFS to resist and it launches at least excuse. If I had a nickle for every time there was a GFS emerged CAC created low under a late spring ridge, that it then ran up over Cuba and right on up the eastern seaboard, I'd buy this web site and then Trump-suppress anyone from ever grousing about them. LOL

Deep tropospheric summer after day 7. Remarkable operational model agreement between the Euro/GFS/GGEM for -d(PNA) seesaw, and this time there doesn't appear to be blocking tendency over the western lime of the NAO domain/N-central Canada. These telecons argue for more warming ridge signal penetrating to higher latitudes E of 100W, and that's precisely ( also ) what these operational runs are signaling. That's a tidy wholesale signal. Yeah, long lead, admittedly ... but, having these converging methods raises the odds over the "confidence climate" for this range and gives the idea some legs. The trough at the end of the week/foreground may or may not host a focused low toward the coast, but that's not as clear as the last ordeal was from this same range. This last one had a narrowed field by virtue of having a big polar +PP sprawling N of 40 N laying in an easterly flow anomaly from Chicago to Halifax. That's low pressure running underneath determinant correlation. Not having that hemisphere this time around provides differences. For one, temp-wise. Instead of 40s rain ... we may yet muster 60 deg type rain. If the low ends up a bit west there even may be some southerly flow that ends with a cold front. ... Not the same set up overall as this last. Does that butt bone a weekend for some? Probably. Not gonna attempt to gaslight that truth... but it just wouldn't be as bad imo. As that whole thing implodes and folds up in latitude the eastern heights recover and we step through the summer door.

Yeah... I gotta say, ever since humanity bore witness to an entire planet jumping in temperature, air and sea alike ...en masse, inside of a 60-day span in the late winter/early spring of 2023, my faith in these climate projections have been rattled. That event was a warning shot. If an entire planet can do that in a geologic time-relative instantaneous span, the next "triggered event" could very well be just as unanticipated. That is the peril in the word, "unanticipated." To point out the obvious ... that means we were blind-sided. We are lucky it was only temperature. Just for muse for a moment, there is a difference between observed climate change, whether linear versus accelerated over time, versus a singular event along the curve - think single bomb in a war. There was once single bomb that went off and ended one: Hiroshima. About 2 or 3 weeks ago I posted an op ed in here where some (admittedly) napkin calculations, utilizing AI assisted inputs, landed on a rather remarkable coincidence of numerology. It turned out, if all the worlds nuclear armament were detonated at once, in a full on "multi-lateral exchange of good will" (LOL), the amount of energy unleashed was very close to the same amount of energy that was required to elevate all the air and sea by 1 C, which is what essentially happened in 2023. Anyway, when I read that article ...the sagging ice idea and just the destabilization et al of Antarctica and Greenland ( in particular, the latter..), I was taken back to 2003, and a water cooler story I heard at a weather conference up at UML. Around that time, an eerie event had taken place amid the interior expanse of the Greenland ice sheet. Three different climate posts stationed out there ( I think it was U.S., Finland and Canada) all reported what registered as 3 and change seismic event, replete with sensations of shaking and rumbling. They immediate phoned one another to corroborate the observation ... but while doing so, they were having trouble with connections - I think it was because the GPS was off ( coms tech was not yet as evolved as it is today). It turned out, all three sites had wondered off their previous locations by some amount of distant, during all that rumbling. The ice, nearly a mile deep mind you, en masse, slid, carrying them all along with it, up to a KM's distance. There won't be a geological event where an enormous amount of land locked ice will suddenly depose into the sea. Just like the whole planet won't up and jump a degree C. Right? Probably not... because gravity will help lock - so we can suppose - the basal ice to the land, crushing from the top as the sagging goes on... This "should" compensate for basal melt water flow rates lubricating the interface... But liquid water also doesn't like to compress too... Point being, "unanticipated" is a dangerous implication for mot inherently being prepare for not suspecting such big world things could ever happen.

mm ... there's a signal for AN+, June 2 -5th It's not overwhelming, granted, but it is above N/S nonetheless. We'll see. I don't have any qualms about it not occurring and ending up fake - it's been the trend all spring that warm signals just don't happen anyway. jesus - But just being objective about the guidance aspects. The operational 00z sets the 500 mb table for a PNA modal expulsion at mid levels, and then the 06z actually has continuity in that idea for a change, while also then filling in the 850 mb +T anomaly. The operational ECM and CMC not seeing it, admittedly... so there's that. What's interesting - if you're a tedious nerd with nothing better to do this morning like myself ... - is that the operational GFS fits the EPS teleconnection much better that either operational run fits their mean. Point is...there's a non-zero (better than N/S ) signal in there that I'm sure we'll summarily see abolished now that I'm posting this ...

https://phys.org/news/2025-05-sea-limited-15c.html

* The warm air temperatures this weekend in the middle to upper 60s may cause people to underestimate the dangers of the cold water temperatures, which are currently only in the lower 50s across Sebago Lake and Lake Winnipesaukee, and in the middle 50s in the regions smaller lakes and rivers.

seems like I've been saying that myself for 10 days worth of runs ... should'a done been here by now